Haryana

StateCommission

A/381/2015

FUTURE GENERALI INDIA INSURANCE CO. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SOMBIR - Opp.Party(s)

PRADEEP KUMAR

07 Oct 2015

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No    :   381 of 2015

Date of Institution :   27.04.2015

Date of Decision   :   07.10.2015

 

1.      Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited, 001, Delta Plaza, 414, Veer Sarvarkar Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai through its Managing Director.

 

2.      The Branch Manager, Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, 1^st Floor, Sehnai Banquet Hall, Opposite Mansarover Park, Rohtak.

 

          Both appellants through its Authorized Officer.

                   Appellants-Opposite Parties

Versus

 

Sombir son of Sh. Mahender Singh, resident of Village Makrana, Tehsil Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani (Haryana).

Respondent-Complainant

 

                            

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member                                                                                                                                         

Present:              Shri Pardeep Kumar, Advocate for appellants.

                             Shri Anil Kumar Saini, Advocate for respondent.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH, J (ORAL)

 

The instant appeal has been filed by Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited and another-opposite parties (for short ‘Insurance Company’) against the order dated March 18^th, 2015 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,  Bhiwani (for short District Forum), whereby complaint filed by Sombir-complainant was allowed.  Operative part of the order is reproduced as under:-

“1.     To pay the insured amount alongwith interest @ 12% from the date of repudiation till its final realization.

2.      To pay Rs.2200/- as litigation charges.

3.      The complainant is directed to hand over the letter of subrogation & keys of the vehicle in question to the company.”

 

2.      Complainant purchased a tractor bearing registration No.HR-14F-3235, from one Balwan for Rs.4,40,000/-. The vehicle was insured with the Insurance Company for the period from January 20^th, 2012 to January 19^th, 2013. The tractor was stolen on August 15^th, 2012.  First Information Report No.270 dated August 16^th, 2012 under section 379 of Indian Penal Code was lodged with the Police Station, Dadri Sadar.  The complainant submitted his claim with the Insurance Company but it was not settled.  Hence, the complainant filed complaint before the District Forum.

3.      The Insurance Company in its reply pleaded that Balwan s/o Sh. Amar Singh, that is, the registered owner of the tractor, had sold it to the complainant.  The theft took place on August 15^th, 2012.  The complainant did not transfer the insurance policy in his name as per GR 17 of India Motor Tariff.  Thus, the complainant was not entitled for the benefits of insurance.

4.      Indisputably, the tractor was insured with the Insurance Company.  During subsistence of the insurance policy, the tractor was stolen on August 15^th, 2012.  FIR was registered on August 16^th, 2012. The claim of the complainant was not settled by the Insurance Company only on the ground that the complainant did not get the insurance policy transferred in his name.  Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has placed reliance upon United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Sou. Kasturi J. Patil, Revision Petition No.4543 of 2012, NC, decided on August 07^th, 2013.  The authority is not applicable to the facts of the present case because in the above cited case vehicle was transferred in the name of complainant on August 07^th, 2007 and accident took place on December 24^th, 2007, that is, after about 3 ½ months.  Till that date, complainant had not informed the Insurance Company.  As per GR 17 of India Motor Tariff, the complainant was under obligation to inform the Insurance Company within fourteen days from the date of transfer of the vehicle in his name.  In the instant case, the complainant had already applied for transfer of ownership of tractor before the Registering Authority (Exhibit C-2 & C-3) and his application was under process.  Therefore, question of informing the Insurance Company does not arise.  Thus, no case for interference in the impugned order is made out and the appeal is dismissed.    

5.      The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the respondent-complainant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

Announced 07.10.2015

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(Nawab Singh) President

UK